Rumor: TNG-HD is a-coming
- Thread starter MrPointy
- Start date
I love how some people argue that it's okay to cut out the effects in the name of HD, but then have a problem with the series being reframed for 16:9 presentation.
While you may put both down to being a purist, they're actually two very different things.
The redone effects are being done from scratch. In theory they could redo them identically to the original, or they could do them from scratch with no limitations. Either way, the aspect ratio will not affect how well they can do this, because they would make them with whatever aspect ratio in mind (or both, as TOS-R probably did).
The problem with reframing the live action to 16:9 isn't just because it's a change from the original, but because by the very nature of how it has to be done, cannot maintain the integrity of the composition. Unlike redoing the CG, they cannot remake the shots from scratch and film it for widescreen. They only have the original 4:3 film. All they can do is crop the image.
I love how some people can't see the issue of cropping off parts of an image, but thinking it will somehow look better simply because it's "widescreen".
Have you actually tried to watch it in 16:9? With TOS, at least, they did such a good job with composition that you can hit the 'zoom' button, 95% of the time you wouldn't know that it was shot in 4:3.
Have you actually tried to watch it in 16:9? With TOS, at least, they did such a good job with composition that you can hit the 'zoom' button, 95% of the time you wouldn't know that it was shot in 4:3.
I have. Our broadcast here on TV was actually the 16:9 crop, and even though I was watching it on a 4:3 set, and had never seen the original episodes, and never knew there was a 16:9 cropped version, I actually found it hard to watch and instantly knew it was cropped (which I confirmed by pressing the aspect ratio button to see it was "widescreen", so tried watching it that way instead to see if the "full" picture).
The heads were cropped so close that they had no hair or chins, and everything felt very claustrophobic in the framing.
If that's what is considered a good job, then I am officially worried.
So is colour tv, has been for decades. Thankfully there were only very few attempts to colourize old black and white movies, and people are still enjoying those old movies, despite the lack of colour.
But there have been a lot of old movies remastered and released in Blu Ray to a high standard. Colorizing black and white is creating something that wasn't there to begin with, however everything that was filmed on 35mm film does have a lot of detail in the picture than has previously been unavailable to domestic audiences.
No. Obviously any Blu-ray releases of TNG will be of little interest to you and you should probably not lose any sleep over what they may contain or how they are presented, particularly since the SD DVDs are already out for you to enjoy.
---------------
You're not getting my point! I'm all for remastering old movies and such, if it only means cleaning up the picture and increasing resolution.
Adding new fx on the other hand IS "creating something that wasn't there to begin with"! The point is, that improving quality is a good thing, making black and white movies colour and adding new fx to Trek is not!
Oh, I'd love TNG in HD on BluRay ... but not with new FX!
Just can't reconcile this point of view. Beside the fact that the old FX only exist in SD, so any HD release must have new FX, some of those effects make no physical sense and are purely the product of limited time/budget/technology.
Others have mentioned Q's energy cage, the variable sized Bird of Prey, Star Base 74 among others. Every planet surface looked like a soundstage, while from orbit they looked like a sneeze. HD Styrofoam, that'll snare the viewers.
One of us here is missing the point. Either TNG is the story of humans exploring the galaxy in the 24th Century, a story worth re-telling to a new audience and would benefit from an update to its visuals, or its an eighties TV show that doesn't look good on a modern TV and just needs a touch up.
Mine is the former, and if i were leading the project I would change everything and anything that placed its production in the eighties/nineties, and sell it as a new show.
"not with new FX" mostly means no CGI replacements for the space shots, matte paintings, etc... because those HAVE been done on film. And they can look exceptional in HD, as the re-used shots in Star Trek: Generations show.
What has been CGI back then can be replaced with new CGI, of course.
"new FX", as we could observe in TOS-R, means that some wize-ass in the VFX company wants to totally recreate the scenes, introducing new camera angles, redesigning space ships, and other shit. Don't do that. Leave the original as much alone as possible.
Yes, I want the same warp-fly by over and over again in every episode, because that's what it has originally been. That's part of the charm of a TV show. Why are all of you guys so crazy for George-Lucas-Presents-Greedo-Shoots-First-And-Jedi-Rocks-"Enhancements"
What has been CGI back then can be replaced with new CGI, of course.
"new FX", as we could observe in TOS-R, means that some wize-ass in the VFX company wants to totally recreate the scenes, introducing new camera angles, redesigning space ships, and other shit. Don't do that. Leave the original as much alone as possible.
Yes, I want the same warp-fly by over and over again in every episode, because that's what it has originally been. That's part of the charm of a TV show. Why are all of you guys so crazy for George-Lucas-Presents-Greedo-Shoots-First-And-Jedi-Rocks-"Enhancements"
It's a piece of art, created in the eighties/nineties ... and it should be treated with respect! Would you give the Mona Lisa breast implants, so that the painting would fit your personal esthetic preference? I'll never understand how people can prefer plastic tits over the real thing, but that's a different story.
Additionally, a remastered bluray will cause the original DVDs to be replaced by remastered DVDs, too. And there you have the Star Wars SE situation. Nobody can buy the original releases anymore.
There's no such thing as a TV series from the '70s, '80s, or '90s that looks good in HD, so at least TNG isn't alone. Eventually people will accept this is just how late-20th Century TV looks.
Post-Production would have to be done from scratch, which takes up a good portion of the budget... enough to justify doing a small season of newer episodes on a cable series.* TNG's live-action footage won't look like it's from the '10s no matter what.
* A new series from scratch could test the waters for having Star Trek back on TV.
Star Trek is back, at least in movies, it's no longer a thing of the past like it was five years ago, so why not do something new?
Post-Production would have to be done from scratch, which takes up a good portion of the budget... enough to justify doing a small season of newer episodes on a cable series.* TNG's live-action footage won't look like it's from the '10s no matter what.
* A new series from scratch could test the waters for having Star Trek back on TV.
Star Trek is back, at least in movies, it's no longer a thing of the past like it was five years ago, so why not do something new?
^^ Because Star Trek as we know it is an enduring piece of culture. People want to see it again and again and again. CBS knows this. So why make a risky new series that might tank like Enterprise if you can just rely on the old series to be watched in syndication? Its a fairly safe investment in the long run, even if it's costly right now. It will pay back eventually.
agreed.
Yes TNG is a syndicated show with more than 100 episodes. If they update it to HD it will still be good for syndication on HD channels. A new show is 'too risky'.
TNG on HD without new effects will no more honor the intent of the original producers than 16:9 framing will. The original effects were designed with low resolution in mind, and the presentation of them mixed in with HD live action will totally upset the look of the series.
---------------
A great man once said. "its just a tv show", but it really is more than that. Its a marketable product, while to others it is an hours distraction, but art?
Way back when I was student this poster hung on my wall. It was before I had an appreciation for fine art but as far as I can tell it hasn't harmed the original in anyway.
Original/old doesn't automatically translate to better. I like classic cars but for reasons of safety, reliability and fuel efficiency I drive a modern one. Plastic tits are unnatural, but they are still tits, which is surely what matters, like remastered Star Trek is still Star Trek. The original is preserved for fans, purists and historians.
Similar threads
